Canon 35-350 L vs 28-300 L IS Lens

[imran_ahmed]

I have had this lens for over 8 years and have been quite happy. I wonder

whether the 28-300L has better image quality apart from the IS advantage. I

would like to hear about members opinions about the newer lens.

[yakim_peled1]

http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/canon_28300_3556/index.htm

 

I shoot mostly handheld so naturally, I find IS to be extremely valuable in low light or telephoto range. I am not a fan of hyperzooms but if I had to choose one, the 28-300 IS would be my pick.

 

Happy shooting,

Yakim.

[john_macpherson]

I have the 35-350 - over ten years of good reliable use and published images.

 

Spoke with Andy Rouse not long ago, who has bought the 28-300IS and he rated it very highly, and if you know his work, many of his recent penguin images were made with the 28-300.

[William Michael]

>>> I am not a fan of hyperzooms but if I had to choose one, the 28-300 IS would be my pick. <<< (YP)

 

Ditto.

 

I have used this lens (28 to 300IS).

 

For a one lens daylight / reportage / on 135 format (film) it is an exceptional lens.

 

I cannot compare it to the 35 to 350 as I have not used that lens.

 

I think these lenses fall into a category most of us do not `need`, but those of us who do need, it always pays to get the best.

 

Either lens is not as effective, as a one lens solution, on APS-C or APS-H bodies.

 

IS is an exceptional friend for this type of lens, if one is using the lens to its capacity, and (assumed) is a one lens kit.

 

WW